Co v. People
G.R. No. 233015
October 16, 2019
FACTS:
The RTC
and CA convicted the accused for the crime of Estafa under Art. 315 2(a) of the
RPC. The accused defraud Jade Progressive Savings and Mortgage Bank, a banking
institution under PH laws. The accused taking advantage of their position, be
means of false pretenses or fraudulent acts of the fraud to the effect that
there exists a contract between the said bank and Acme Investigation Services,
Inc. a non-existent security agency, that the said security services of which
were rendered in favor of the said bank, did in fact with the intent to
defraud, authorize the release of P3,032,090 and collect the same from the
bank’s funds for the purpose of paying the said security agency, said accused
knowing fully well that no such security agency existed, no such contract
exists between the said bank and the said agency, and no such security services
were rendered in favor of the said bank and therefore no payment in the said
amount of P3M having been made to the agency that such acts/pretenses were only
made by the accused for the purpose of obtaining as in fact, they did obtain
the said amount from the funds of the bank for their own personal use and
benefit, thereby defrauding the said bank and its depositors and creditors to
the damage and prejudice of the said Bank, its depositors and creditors, and
the BSP in the said amount.
ISSUE:
Whether
or not the CA erred in affirming the RTC
HELD:
Yes.
The crime charged was falsification of a private document, not estafa. To
properly charge an accused with estafa under Art. 315 2(a), the information
should aver the following elements: 1.)
that the accused used a fictitious name or false pretense that he possesses
power, influence, qualifications, property, credit, agency, business, imaginary
transaction, or other similar deceits; 2.) that the accused used such deceitful
means prior to or simultaneous with the execution of the fraud 3.) that the
offended party relied on such deceitful means to part with his money or
property and 4.) that the offended party suffered damage.
